Leaderboard

We've devloped a 3D view for our 2D editor. Check our our free mission planner as well

Russian Forum by Chizh. Bf-109K-4 and Fw-190D-9 on the To Do list to update 3D model as all old 3D models. Early generation SAM system planed. Tochka, Iskander, HIMARS on the wishlist to build on a future. Improvements on SAM systems on the wishlist Cruise missile waypoints on the wishlist.

Hard to judge on this but I put a lot of focus on the FM. It uses a detailed dynamic main rotor simulation and the fuselage aerodynamics are based on wind tunnel data. Downwash of the main rotor has impact on the empenage aerodynamics. In addition to that I spend some time to test the FM against flighttest reports. I am quite happy with the results.

Great video with some additional explanations about the 2024 and beyond video by Wags:

I will try to explain the problem with this map in pictures: No bridge to cross one of the largest cities in the Nile Delta, Mansourah, supposed to be a real road crossroads : No bridge at Shirbin too, another city on the Damietta Branch of the Nil : In Damahur, there is the bare minimum to cross the largest rivers, but practically nothing to cross the small rivers. 80% of the bridges are missing! And all this for the major cities of the Nile Delta... There are practically no bridges in the smaller cities or in the inter-urban space! Consequences on pathfinding with a practical case: I take a vehicle on the coast and I want to go to waypoint 1, south of El Mansura: Despite direct roads, there is no major bridge around the city, the convoy is obliged to do a very large detour to the West and the South between Tanta and Al Zaqazik I now want to take my convoy to Waypoint 2 : New Damietta. While with the expected routes passing through El Mansura (there would be 65 km of road), the convoy will literally take a 200 km detour passing next to Al Salihiyah, the Suez Canal and passing through Port Said!!! Ok. Well, I want to go back to El Mansoura for my Waypoint 3, but this time, I'm going to stay on the same side of the Nile, I could probably hope for a direct route since I'm not crossing any major rivers..... And Well no ! Even so, the lack of bridges over simple small streams forces my vehicle to make a huge detour, returning through my origin point. It is practically impossible on this map to have a fairly direct route because of the quantity of waterways and the total lack of bridges!!! And for my last waypoint 4, I'm going to push the pathfinding problem of this map to the absurd: As the crow flies, my waypoint 3-4 is 35 km. By road, it is practically the same distance theoretically since there is a direct route between these 2 waypoints. But the lack of a bridge will force you to make a detour of around 160 km! These absurd pathfinding problems can be reproduced almost anywhere in the Nile Delta, making this map a real headache for a missionmaker in order to determine convoy routes, or coherent road axes. However, it would not take much to solve this problem: Simply the addition of a hundred bridges scattered at least in all the major or secondary cities of the delta, and on all river routes. For me this problem should be the ABSOLUTE PRIORITY of OnReTech, because in my eyes it is considerably more important than adding more details to the pyramids, adding new types of trees or buildings... The map must be PRACTICAL, otherwise, it will be shunned by missionmakers. It doesn't seem to me that these additions are that complicated to make, but their importance is crucial for the appreciation of the map! I wanted to do some dynamic missions on this new map which excited me and which I found magnificent: I quickly returned to the Syria map, because I couldn't do what I wanted due to the total lack of bridges... It's a shame for a suh beautiful map!! We are not only fly over the Delta. We make CAS missions for Helicopter and CAS plane. So the roads must be pratical for convoy!

I’ll second this!!!! CH, your work is amazing and very much appreciated. Do whatever makes the most sense for you!

Ich mag diese ganzen modernen Bildschirm-Flieger überhaupt nicht, die Cold-War-Area ist viel spannender (nur meine Meinung!). Und dass es die A wird (plus hoffentlich die G-Version) freut mich als Angehörigen und inoffiziellen Presseoffizier der deutschen FULCRUM-Staffel ganz besonders (wenn ich es in RL auch nur auf 13 Stunden im Backseat gebracht habe). Diese Version ist in der NATO bis in alle Einzelheiten bekannt (hab selber noch die Dash one im Bücherschrank stehen) und daher vergeben sich die Russen nichts, wenn die in allen Einzelheiten simuliert wird. Etwas Moderneres wird bei der derzeitigen Lage nicht kommen oder nur stark verfremdet. Und so unterlegen waren wir mit dem Jet Anfang der 1990er gar nicht, das Helmvisier war eine böse Überraschung für die Sparrings-Partner und die F-16-Piloten haben sich sehr oft geschlagen geben müssen. Das Radar war ein Problem, wir haben versucht, dessen Fähigkeiten zu erweitern, mussten aber aufgeben, es war halt für ein anderes Einsatzkonzept entwickelt (GCI bis zum Feuerbefehl). Und die Reichweite … tja … da erinnere ich mich sofort an einen Satz in einem unserer Briefings für NATO-Offizielle, der das auf den Punkt brachte: ”The FULCRUM is the ideal point defender - if the point to defend is the own airfield.” Ich freue mich jetzt schon mehr auf das Ding als auf die F-4. Fliegerisch macht dieser perfekt kontruierte Auftriebskörper mit Triebwerken, die dank der Intake-Verschlüsse und der sich dann öffnenden Lamellen auf der Oberseite nicht mal bei einem Tailslide ausgehen, und der absolut gutmütigen Flugeigenschaften einen enormen Spaß!

Honestly, the amount of people on here that complain while simultaneously having their arm extended, palm open, is shocking. CH is a one man army that provide us with quality assets for our favorite game... for free. SO MANY assets in fact that updating them without packaging them up has become unsustainable. IDK man, people are hard to please I guess.

OP updated.

Yes it is

Then stop acting like "believer" yourself. Nobody in this thread said DLSS gives better quality than raw rendering. We all know it comes at a price of some quality. But acceptable or "noticeable" quality reduction from using it is a personal preference and different for everyone, just like acceptable minimum framerate, or acceptable level of stuttering. You seem to be blind to that fact, though.

Be able to 3D view object and terrain on editor, so you do not need to run the mission to see if you have putted correct the ground unit.This will have a lot of time in mission editing.

Алгоритм действий для стрельбы НАРами издали по навигатору ns430 для ми24, а также ми8, су25 и любых других. 1) При помощи внешних видов f7 от лица союзных единиц, найти мишень на карте обзорным способом (разведка с беспилотника). 2) Определить координаты мишени. Для этого отождествить её положение в трехмерном мире с точкой на карте ф10. Карту ф10 для полного совпадения переключить в режим спутникового снимка. Поставить маркер. 3) Навести курсор на маркер. В левом верхнем углу карты ф10 будут показаны координаты курсора. Навигатор по умолчанию принимает их в виде градус-минута-сотые доли минуты, к примеру, N43°56.12 E45°30.70 Ф10 позволяет отображать координаты таким образом (понажимать на координаты мышкой пока не получится). 4)Создать точку в навигаторе ns430 и проложить до неё маршрут(либо просто запомнить и проложить прямой путь прямо до неё в любой удобный момент в воздухе). В результате навигатор покажет направление и дистанцию до мишени на первой и самой главной для нас странице nav-1. На этой странице три важных показателя :расстояние DST(переключить навигатор в режим отображения дистанции в км и сохранить настройки. Это делается один раз и запоминается навсегда даже после перезапуска игры),TRK и BRG. Расстояние позволяет понять когда именно делать маневр и пускать ракеты. TRK означает траекторию полета, BRG - направление на мишень. Если лететь таким образом, чтобы сравнялись ТРК и БРГ, то можно пролететь прямо над мишенью. Так это было бы в идеальном мире. А в настоящем так работает только на Кавказе и (я думаю) на других картах, которые поддерживаются модулем навигатора. Сирия в их число не входит, и на Сирии TRK показывает правильный угол, такой же как на внешнем виде ф2 и на карте ф10 линейкой. А вот все остальные углы в навигаторе на Сирии, в т ч BRG, почему-то, отличаются на -6 или -7 градусов. Так что если вы собираетесь пролететь над мишенью, Вам необходимо держать TRK=BRG+7 на Сирии. А на су25 почему-то +8-9 на Сирии. Все это легко проверить. Но не расстраивайтесь, т к это не мешает навигатору правильно понимать координаты широты долготы даже на Сирии, а это самое важное. Мы научились пролетать над мишенью. Но это не совсем то, что надо. Для стрельбы нужны 3 вещи: А) Иметь уверенность в том, что по при выстреле ракеты попадут в перекрестье по направлению, а не уйдут левее или правее, как это обычно бывает. Б) Знать где мишень по направлению, чтобы можно было совместить с ней перекрестье. В) Выбрать правильно угол для выстрела, чтобы ракеты попали без недолета или перелета. Для выполнения пункта А, воспользуемся вычислителем ми24. Переведем прицел ми24 в режим фиксированной дальности, выбрав предельную 3500м и используем АВТО режим подвижной марки. Триммируем вертолёт так, чтобы подвижная и неподвижная сетки прицела точно совпали по горизонтали в горизонтальном прямолинейном полете без разворота влево либо вправо. Это достигается креном и скольжением. При выстреле ракеты по горизонтали попадут туда, где был прицел, а не левее или правее. Причем это верно не только для 3500м, а для любой дальности. Обращаем внимание на то, что при таком триммировании, вертолёт имеет угол сноса: летит немножко боком и направление продольной оси конструкции, совпадающее с неподвижной сеткой прицела, отличается от направления полета вертолёта TRK. (РИСУНОК) Запоминаем этот угол сноса(триммирование) и используем его перед выстрелом. Обращаю внимание на то, что если кардинально поменять курс полета, боковой ветер изменится и это триммирование станет неактуальным, придется переделывать. Авто режим вычислителя работает только до 3500м, поэтому для дальности 6-8 км мы им не будем пользоваться. Вместо этого, мы используем режим ручного выставления угла прицела согласно углам, приведенным в дополнении в конце. К примеру, если стреляем ракетами с8ком на 7 км, ставим угол прицела по вертикали между 9 и 9.5 градусов вниз. По горизонтали оставляем 0, т к мы боковой промах учли триммированием. Для попадания по дальности, ушедшую вниз прицельную марку совмещаем с воображаемой мишенью(её же не видно), задрав нос ЛА. Если воображение подводит, то просто ориентируемся на горизонт или чуть ниже. При превышении цели наоборот выше. Последние ракеты надо выпускать ниже первых для того, чтобы уменьшить длину поля разрывов. Потому что последние ракеты мы будем пускать находясь выше и ближе к мишени. Мы решили вопросы А и В, но остался ещё Б. Для того, чтобы понять, где находится мишень по горизонтали, выставляем траекторию пролёта TRK над мишенью. Но после того, как мы затриммировались на стрельбу, из-за угла сноса прицел с траекторией не совпадает, а значит, не совпадает с направлением на мишень. Чтобы это скомпенсировать, корректируем курс на величину угла сноса без изменения положения педалей для того, чтобы совпала продольная ось и направление BRG на мишень. Например, на Сирии у нас BRG 268, угол сноса 3 влево. Мы должны поддерживать TRK курс полёта 268+6(баг навигатора на Сирии)-3=271 TRK. В таком случае, мишень находится ровно по прицелу спереди. При приближении к дальности пуска, запоминаем ориентир, за которым находится мишень, при прохождении дальности по таблице делаем маневр (можно не сильно спешить) и пускаем по ориентиру. МИ24п шаг 7-8 = 200 кмч приборной скорости КОМ 5 км 200 кмч угол 5 6 км 200 кмч угол 6,5-7 7 км 200 кмч угол 9-9,5 ОФП 5 км 200 кмч угол 3 7 км 200 кмч угол 5 8 км 200 кмч угол 6,5 9 км 200 кмч угол 8 9,7 км 200 кмч угол 9,5-10 C5КО 5 км 200 кмч угол 10 C13 5 км 200 кмч угол 5 7 км 200 кмч угол 7-7,5 C24 2,5 км 200 кмч угол 7 На ми24 можно действовать и проще. Триммироваться на нулевой угол сноса и не брать в голову подвижную марку, стрелять по центру неподвижной. Думаю это не хуже вариант, ТК такие тонкости не важны когда мишень не видно. А вот на ми8 думаю нельзя триммировать на нулевое скольжение, т к там оно изначально большое по сравнению с ми24 6-7 градусов.

I am not sure why @Wags said it was Bagram, which seems to be repeated by @Silver_Dragon but nevertheless I must say that the quality of detail on the upcoming Bagdad airport looks rather promising. Well done ED terrain team, really nice piece of work in progress. Funny that neither of the experienced airmen could tell the difference, with at least Wombat putting a correct guess -

I have put this project on hold for the moment. Both my testing and parenthood activities take all of my free time. And my job does not help either. I recently asked devs to allow custom raster charts from the Saved Games folder. If they made it happen, it would probably motivate me enough to resume work on this map.

Thanks for the response! Very excited to fly it. Do we have a ballpark release date-ish?

This looks phenomenal. Crazy that DCS didn't offer something like this in the first place. Thanks so much for doing this! When can we expect this to be released?

Some joysticks that are programmable only assign a momentary press even if the button is held so might wanna doublecheck and make sure that is not an issue as well.

Yes, with the latest version of SimShaker Sound Module it shouldn't be hard. Use the Samples Customizer feature as we discussed a little bit above. https://simshaker.com/downloads/beta_SimShaker_Sound_Module_Setup_v_2.37.msi

Oh, wenn nur das Überspringen des Seils durch den Haken gemeint war, dann liegt das Problem eher in einem schlechten/falschen Aufsetzwinkel, der aus einem schlechten/falschen Anflug resultiert. Das man aber unbedingt ein komplettes Case 1 Pattern fliegen muss damit die Landung klappt kann ich hingegen nicht bestätigen. Ich selbst tu nämlich nie Case 1 (oder 2, 3) Patterns fliegen und habe mich mit denen auch nie beschäftigt. Statt dessen fliege ich das Deck immer direkt an wenn ich zum Träger zurückkehre und dabei halte ich mich auch an keine aus dem Lehrbuch auswendig gelernten Parameter. Ich fliege das Deck einfach so an, dass der AOA indexer mir "On Speed" anzeigt und das wars im Prinzip. So klappt die Landung bei mir jedenfalls zuverlässig. Wichtig ist halt dass man On Speed, also mit richtiger Geschwindigkeit, Anflug- und Anstellwinkel. Dafür brauch man aber nicht unbedingt ein kompletter Case Pattern zu fliegen geschweige denn auswendig zu lernen.

Made modification OvGME ready (without unzip) for those who don't want/know how modify original mod https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fdXRR8wwnSFyOWYKsRgZXdAyrWAr1h9i/view?usp=sharing

The situation with the Navy F-4 is somewhat unique. Navy F-4 will share a considerable amount of code with the F-4E, and much other code will just be modified from F-4E. Other important additions such as Jester are also shared. I can’t think of 2 other such closely inter-dependent modules. There is still a lot of work between them, but not like starting the F-4E from scratch. All this means that “maturing” the F-4E module does contribute towards the Navy F-4 module. In addition HB stated that work on some of the modules is going to be parallelized, so their production queue is not strictly linear. HB have also started that F-4E will come out in a close to complete state, so I hope they will not leave it at “in development” state for years. I would not hold my breath just yet since the F-4E is not even out yet. However, I am optimistic that a Navy F-4 is possible within up to 2 years. I also suppose that it depends how well the F-4E sells, which affects the projected sales of F-4Navy and HB’s priorities/motivation accordingly.

We finally figured it out and got it working. This is what we used in the lau. We removed all the old BORT text to fix our skin issue, and added new stuff in the "green". Helmet stuff is bolded. livery = { {"f18c1", 0 ,"F18C_1_DIFF115_SBDGRY_BD",false}; {"f18c1", ROUGHNESS_METALLIC ,"../VMFA-115 Common/F18C_1_DIFF_115L_CAMOROUGHMET",false}; {"f18c2", 0 ,"F18C_2_DIFF115_SBDGRY_BD",false}; {"f18c2", ROUGHNESS_METALLIC ,"../VMFA-115 Common/F18C_2_DIFF_115L_CAMOROUGHMET",false}; --Stay / Covers {"f18c_stay", 0, "../VMFA-115 Common/F18C_1_DIFF_STAY_DIF", false}; {"f18c_stay", 1, "f18c_1_diff_stay_nm", true}; {"f18c_stay", 2, "f18c_1_diff_stay_dif_roughmet", true}; -- new code start {"f18c1_number_nose_right", 0 ,"F18C_1_DIFF_323L",false}; {"f18c1_number_nose_right", ROUGHNESS_METALLIC ,"F18C_1_DIF_RoughMet",true}; {"f18c1_number_nose_right", DECAL ,"empty",true}; {"f18c1_number_nose_left", 0 ,"F18C_1_DIFF_323L",false}; {"f18c1_number_nose_left", ROUGHNESS_METALLIC ,"F18C_1_DIF_RoughMet",true}; {"f18c1_number_nose_left", DECAL ,"empty",true}; {"f18c2_kil_right", 0 ,"F18C_2_DIFF_323L",false}; {"f18c2_kil_right", ROUGHNESS_METALLIC ,"F18C_2_DIF_RoughMet",true}; {"f18c2_kil_right", DECAL ,"empty",true}; {"f18c2_kil_left", 0 ,"F18C_2_DIFF_323L",false}; {"f18c2_kil_left", ROUGHNESS_METALLIC ,"F18C_2_DIF_RoughMet",true}; {"f18c2_kil_left", DECAL ,"empty",true}; {"f18c1_number_F", 0 ,"F18C_1_DIFF_323L",false}; {"f18c1_number_F", ROUGHNESS_METALLIC ,"F18C_1_DIF_RoughMet",true}; {"f18c1_number_F", DECAL ,"empty",true}; {"f18c2_number_X", 0 ,"F18C_2_DIFF_323L",false}; {"f18c2_number_X", ROUGHNESS_METALLIC ,"F18C_2_DIF_RoughMet",true}; {"f18c2_number_X", DECAL ,"empty",true}; {"pilot_F18_helmet_HGU68", DIFFUSE , "pilot_f18_helmet", false}; {"pilot_F18_helmet_HGU68", NORMAL_MAP , "pilot_f18_helmet_normal", false}; {"pilot_F18_helmet_HGU68", 13 , "pilot_F18_helmet_roughmet", false}; -- new code end {"FPU_8A", 0 ,"../VMFA-115 Common/FPU_8A_115",false}; {"FPU_8A", 1 ,"../VMFA-115 Common/FPU_8A_115_NM",false}; {"FPU_8A", ROUGHNESS_METALLIC ,"../VMFA-115 Common/FPU_8A_115_CAMO_RM",false}; {"pilot_F18", 0 ,"../VMFA-115 Common/pilot_F18_CDN",false}; {"pilot_F18_patch", 0 ,"../VMFA-115 Common/pilot_F18_patch_CANADA",false}; {"pilot_F18_patch", 1 ,"../VMFA-115 Common/pilot_f18_patch_CANADA_nm",false}; {"pilot_F18_patch", ROUGHNESS_METALLIC ,"../VMFA-115 Common/pilot_f18_patch_CANADA_RM",false}; } name = "VMFA-115 Bonedust" countries = {"USA",} custom_args = { [27] = 0.0, -- Tail change of type of board number (0.0 -default USA, 0.1- ) [1000] = 0.0, -- Flaps [1001] = 0.0, -- Nose [1002] = 1, -- Kuwait Squadron [1003] = 1, -- Australian Squadron [1004] = 1, -- Finland Squadron [1005] = 1, -- Switzerland Squadron [1006] = 1, -- Blue Angels Jet Team }

Quick question, is the below video the OH-6 in action you are working? It was on Eight Ball's YouTube Channel.

If you have some sort of god complex, it must be truly difficult to endure the opinion of heretics.

Very cool. Feel free to use those Yamato/Musashi files I posted. I also updated the current version with some custom sounders. I can share it if you want.

I love this card, it's really fun to play. On the other hand, if it is very rich in roads, it is extremely lacking in bridges, to the point that drawing up a convoy route to cross the Nile delta considerably restricts the possibilities. For the map to be truly perfect and usable, you have to add many bridges across the delta, like thoses who really exists ! Once this is done, the map will be really excellent! As it stands, it limits a lot of possibilities, it's a shame

Recent events have brought the IL-18/20/22 series back into the forefront of headlines! Would be great to see these aircraft in-game.

So it's been ... a while since the last Scim update. Work has continued, mostly on the research side for the last couple of months, but a little 3D work here and there. As is the way with many DCS modding projects, it all takes much longer than one expects, and learning an entirely new way to do 3D, as well as working from some pretty questionable documentation has made this much more challenging. I've also been much busier with the unavoidable "real life" (which I am now quite convinced does exist and wasn't just made up to stop me practicing case III recoveries), and a couple of other projects which I've been splitting my time with to avoid burn-out. It's about a year since I started this project, and although I have definitely not progressed at the speed I had hoped, it's been a lot of fun so far. The Scimitar isn't going anywhere, but for the time being it's going on the back burner until I can get better 3D reference, be it more detailed plans or scans of models perhaps. I will be working on the cockpit here and there, and might even finish off the current 3D model for AI use only over the next couple of months (pretty pictures will of course be provided where appropriate). In the meantime I have a couple of other DCS mod projects that will be announced in due course so stay tuned in the forums and discord.

Tease =/= reveal

Been wanting one of these ever since I started DCS............awesome!! Joined the Discord

ED does not do anything with the voice data apart from routing it between customer owned DCS game clients It is a distributed network already thanks

The early F-4s could go slower than 140 thanks to being light and BLC. The flaps were tested during the 60s, when they were trying to figure out if there was any use in them for BFM. They found there was none. Hard wing jets would need to stay fast or have a golden hands guy doing slow speed stuff. It's not like they didn't lose like 100 jets due to departures before the slats. The slats helped quite a bit in flying the jet slow, but they didn't take all the edge off the adverse yaw and they certainly didn't change the fact that there was no HOTAS and no advanced BFM modes to help the pilot achieving his goal. Naturally, going fast-fast means you can use the vertical, while Dr. Strangelove in his 60s boomer-jet is tied to being a flat-earther. So while bubba Rhinodriver is using all his limbs to get some tone, get into prarameters and squeeze off a Sidewinder, ole Doug Masters is just listening to 80s hair metal, yanking on that early non-movable sidestick with his boots on the floor, spitting epic one-liners while easily foxxing that salty mustache-model in his sweaty flight suit. Disclaimer: Message may contain traces of nuts, bolts and organic humor.

Veeeeery early WIP, so don't get too excited.

One simple alternative for tanks would be to either remove the penality in reload time (unrealistic, but it also shoudn't be 15+ seconds) or to remove the 2 racks entirely. So, instead of having 14/28 Sabot rounds, you would have 42. The better option is to fix the feature as OP suggested, and give you the option to choose when to reload the ready ammo rack at any time.

1)Недостаточное демпфирование(С выпущенными шасси чуть подкрутили, а вот без шасси всё так же слишком резкий). 2)Проблемы с двигателями (их автоматикой и тягой) и вообще ЛТХ на больших высотах. 3) Работа автопилота. А так же правильности режимов "Возврат" и "Посадка", если это конечно от самого самолёта зависит. 4) Ну и если придираться к кабине, то там как минимум Кран шасси в положении "Выпущено" отображается в нейтральном положении. На самом деле он должен ниже опускаться). И лётчика в кабину уже давно пора посадить) 5) Ещё анимация парашюта. При раскрытии купола парашют перестаёт сохранять одну ось с ВПП и уходит под землю(если его выпускать с поднятой носовой стойкой) На Су-27 такой проблемы нет. Ну и вообще отображение парашютов у клиентов уже больше года неработает.

Relax, sometimes it's worth cross check info, and that's what I did. I did not attack neither of you guys, I appreciate all the efforts. Please take no offense as none was intended, written text sometimes conveys message without the emotions and sometimes that message can be taken with a lot of emotions. Important though is to convey facts at all times.

From Orbx Discord: https://discord.com/channels/830991978337927189/1008311429792813097/1195141971744927794

It seems that the graphics settings are becoming more complicated, and there seems to be many conflicting opinions on what to set and why, and since everyone has different hardware and expectations, so much seems to based on trial-and-error and plain guesswork, especially if you add VR into the mix. Is it feasible to allow the sim to run a benchmarking process to auto-set the various parameters based on a simple Quality <> Performance slider? Of course we should retain the individual options for those who like to tweak, but a 90% solution would be accommodated by the single slider setting or a target FPS input. I know other games I've had in the past run a type of benchmarking as part of the install process, and then self configures the graphics settings. I'm sure this would be a popular option for many users, especially those new to DCS.

I remember they once said that MiG-19S would be a part of the MiG-19 module pack. So in that sense, people who paid for MiG-19P paid for S. Yep, you are right. They didn't use as many polygons as other modules in DCS. That's why I am not happy with the MiG-19 module. Not only they used so few polygons, we rarely get updates for this module compared with others. Many buttons are still unmappable and many axis don't work as intended. For example, axis like the light, gunsight won't even move until you move your axis pass 50%. And if you tried to map them onto buttons, hehe, for a single press of that button, it will increase or decrease the volume by a light year, making micro-adjustment impossible. And we only have 1 cycling button for the airbrake, which has 2 positions.

Hi Folks! Building on the lessons learned from my 3D printable F-5E/F-4E grip, I've been working on something new! Rough first print here, but once refined, files will be posted to my Cults3D page (in the coming weeks)!

Loved the trailer and I'm completely jazzed about flying the F4. That said, I have very little time, and although I like to support the developers, I don't want to throw my $ away with a few flights in a the non-carrier variant only to spend the same amount on the carrier version when it comes out. Of course, if the carrier version will be a small add-on fee (or even free), then yes I can see picking up this module now. Does anyone know how the carrier version will be marketed? and... when it might come out?

Each map object can be set with zone - right click - assign zone - don't change anything in the default naming, size, etc. Then use triggers such as: bomb in zone (could be problematic a little) or zone object destroyed trigger, also with such zones MIST or other scripts can be utilized to "capture" the fact that map object was destroyed. Other than that, you can place a hidden (invisible to AI) soldier next to the building, or on top of it or whatever and have a trigger to register his death and deduct points. Also discussing Syria map is out of scope here so I won't comment more than point out the fact that Syria is coming with big update to destroyable objects - check its forum section and updates from MAESTRO.

Am I the only one who doesn't have radio communication? Airfield frequencies have been set. The radio menu is called up, but I cannot contact the flight boss.

It could be a big difference, if you are currently CPU limited. With good single-pass VR the CPU overhead from VR should be closer to non-VR DCS. There's still overhead from the VR pipeline and drivers, but that's on a different thread anyways. So if a modern CPU can run flatscreen DCS at 120fps, it should also easily handle VR at the same settings at let's say 90fps. This would mean that all modern "gaming" CPUs (i5, i7 and AMD equivalents) from the last few years should be "good enough" for 90fps VR. Those that are limited by their GPU will not benefit from that though. For higher resolution, you'd still want a better GPU... Also this is all speculation. Lower CPU overhead is a very realistic expectation, but i've also laid out the most optimal scenario. Please note that ED officials were always very cautious when talking about performance gains from vulkan. Also this is only about single-pass VR. Vulkan is an essential retooling for the engine and it could come with improvments and even degradation in other areas. For example one can hope that Vulkan will help with the insane VRAM consumption of DCS, either by introducing smarter texture compression wizadry, or simply by doing better VRAM management...

Апну тему. Уважаемые разработчики есть ли подвижки по этому направлению? П.с. рад вернуться, большой прогресс за год, спасибо за вашу работу.

A happy new year everyone! I´m looking to add 1 or 2 highly motivated pilots that are up for a challenge. In addition to the things outlined in the OP you should be able to: - start, takeoff and land in a controlled manner) - intercept a given course - fly a given speed, heading and altitude - do Air refuelling Basic stuff really, right? Most of all however, you should be active, enthusiastic and committed. Anything else we´ll cover going forward. As usual, reply here or send me a PM and we´ll chat.

You can try with this edited mission that IIRC gives more time between enemy waves but it's still pretty difficult as we're limited to 20,500 lbs VTO's and have about 1,000 lbs less fuel than in 2018. APKWS is available at the FARP which might help. AV8B Fire Brigade - River Defense, 20231015.miz

Single role or map size is not a problem. There are aircraft enthusiasts of all kind so the question is rather about financial feasibility. No low fidelity modules are planned - this type of modeling is abandoned in DCS. Now to make the module you're looking at years of work and research, even if you already have enough experience in both coding and 3d modeling, you also need full documentation of the aircraft, including flight performance data and weapon systems, and to make it decent you'd need at least a few SMEs (preferably ex-pilot, nav guy and maybe some maintenance stuff).